Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:42:10 -0800
From:      Doug Silver <dsilver@urchin.com>
To:        Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>, Doug Barton <DougB@freebsd.org>
Cc:        "ports@FreeBSD.org" <ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Please reserve UID/GID for bacula port
Message-ID:  <200401071442.10995.dsilver@urchin.com>
In-Reply-To: <20040107215944.GB25920@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>
References:  <200401070846.i078kppZ001556@odie.koellers.net> <20040107133553.O59570@qbhto.arg> <20040107215944.GB25920@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 07 January 2004 01:59 pm, Brooks Davis wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:48:42PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Lars K=F6ller wrote:
> > > Sorry, but I can't give you a number. But I think there is no
> > > "large percentage of our userbase" using it. Even some active FreeBSD
> > > user are on the bacula mailing list.
> >
> > Ok, then I like the idea of the port itself adding some lines to
> > /etc/services to accomodate this. As for the argument that they would
> > get deleted by (improper decisions made while using) mergemaster, it
> > would be up to the port author to make it clear ... something like:
> >
> > # These three lines are added by ports/sysutils/bacula
> > bacula-1	9999/tcp	# Added by ports/sysutils/bacula
> > ...
> > # End of lines added by ports/sysutils/bacula
> >
> > That way the user has a fighting chance of making the right mergemaster
> > decision, and the port has an easy way to delete those lines when its
> > uninstalled.
>
> At the very least it would be good to not add lines for services which
> already exist so the user doesn't end up with a new copy of the lines
> every time they do a portupgrade.  That way you avoid situations like
> the way the perl ports spam make.conf with 11 lines of crap every time
> perl gets upgraded on a 5.x system.
>
> -- Brooks

=46WIW -

The www/urchin5 port by default also uses port 9999.  This is not something=
=20
that we desire to be reserved solely for our use since this can be changed =
at=20
any time.  Just thought I should point it out as the port was just recently=
=20
added but we certainly don't have any desire to reserve 9999 as specific to=
=20
Urchin.

=2DDoug Silver



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200401071442.10995.dsilver>